MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3121944885 · doi:10.1142/s2010139215500196

Does Institutional Ownership Promote the Transformation of Underperforming Firms?

2015· article· en· W3121944885 on OpenAlex
Grigori Erenburg, Janet Kiholm Smith, Richard L. Smith

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueQuarterly Journal of Finance · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicCorporate Finance and Governance
Canadian institutionsThe King's UniversityWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPersistence (discontinuity)BusinessInstitutional investorMonetary economicsAsset (computer security)Quality (philosophy)Financial systemEconomicsFinanceCorporate governance

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We focus on firms that chronically underperform and evaluate ways that institutional investors can facilitate asset redeployment. Increases in institutional holdings are associated with subsequent acquisition and decreases are associated with subsequent failure. For surviving underperformers, holdings and changes are associated with improved performance, but long-run abnormal returns remain negative and Q remains low. This association between holdings and performance is not causal. Rather, it is explained by “flight to quality” combined with persistence of financial performance, including persistence of abnormal returns for underperformers. The evidence casts doubt on interpretations in previous findings of positive relationships between holdings and performance.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.704
Threshold uncertainty score0.203

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.002
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.026
GPT teacher head0.220
Teacher spread0.194 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it